A Case Against Cardio

Depends on the goal. And don't forget to factor in enjoyment. The best exercise is the type you enjoy.

I will try to read all of that later, but the thing that turns me off of most paleo writers I've read (and I have not read a lot) is the sarcastic tone, which this article also has.

Hopefully when I read the whole article there will be explanation of why marathon runners were chosen for the "cardio" group, when current medical recommendations are for much less aerobic exercise for maximum heart health. Marathon runners often go beyond aerobic levels into anaerobic levels, so it seems an odd choice for the study. Why not use people that do the medically recommended levels of aerobic activity? I also wonder (okay, doubt) that anyone thinks aerobic activity makes them immortal (there's that sarcastick tone I mentioned).

I will try to read all of that later, but the thing that turns me off of most paleo writers I've read (and I have not read a lot) is the sarcastic tone, which this article also has.

I think Kurt Harris is pretty even-handed in general. He dips into sarcasm once in awhile, but he's not writing a scientific article, he's writing to a blog audience. I could point you to hundreds of non-"paleo" writers with equal amounts of sarcasm (often while lampooning the "caveman diet.") Many of them are also parroting conventional wisdom, without a hint of scientific references anywhere. So, your complaint (and the earlier complaints by many--myself included--about Mark Sisson's post) might be more generalized to "blog writers everywhere" and not just "paleo writers."

Hopefully when I read the whole article there will be explanation of why marathon runners were chosen for the "cardio" group, when current medical recommendations are for much less aerobic exercise for maximum heart health. Marathon runners often go beyond aerobic levels into anaerobic levels, so it seems an odd choice for the study. Why not use people that do the medically recommended levels of aerobic activity? I also wonder (okay, doubt) that anyone thinks aerobic activity makes them immortal (there's that sarcastick tone I mentioned).

I believe the studies where specifically looking at the "too much of a good thing" present in marathoners -- they weren't aiming to say that moderate amounts of aerobic activity are harmful. But, yes, I do think that many people think that if moderate amounts of aerobic activity is good, then more is better. I know people personally who have lost weight and gotten healthier by running some 5Ks who then thought something along the lines of "if 12 miles a week is good, certainly upping that will be even better." Many of these people will drive 3 miles round trip in pleasant weather because they "don't have the time" and certainly don't see the walk as exercise, but they will then go home and pound the pavement/treadmill for a couple hours even if they DON'T REALLY LIKE IT.

Maybe it's just that Americans have a "more is more" mentality, but it's out there. I think that is what Dr. Harris was trying to address. I don't think that he's saying getting out and hiking at a local park or playing some tennis or, hell, running a few miles a few times isn't a good thing.

I don't buy into the guru-ness of Mark Sisson because I think that our genome has indeed adapted in the past 10,000 years. But plenty of people love his paleo/primal gig and say it makes them feel great.

Please, if you, or someone you know participates in sports, stop now, before the cardio kills you.

I can't wait to get home and kill myself with some Zumba. What a fun way to go!!

And then I think I'll eat some whole grains.

I don't know what the point of doing ANY sport at less than maximum effort, or for less than 30 minutes would be.

Whatever works for this guy is great, but frankly, he sounds really boring to me. I'd much rather hang with dancers, cyclists, surfers and SUPers -- people who enjoy what life has to offer, people who work their bodies because they are creative, enjoy nature, love pushing limits and improving their skills.

Time to go pump the iron at the smelly gym.

I have learned to focus my training on one major goal: so I can play—hard! I hope you can get into that same mindset. Why else do we want to be strong and fit and able to run and jump? In order to enjoy our existence. Being unable to walk up those stairs or lift that box of books equals just another thing to worry about and stress over. When you don’t have to worry about the physical stuff anymore, or the aches and pains, you can start enjoying life again. Stress dissipates, melts away. Life is good when you’re able to play.

The way I see it, the ability to play (Primal Blueprint Lifestyle Law # 7)—to engage in unscripted, random bouts of youthful exuberance with loved ones, friends, and family—is the ultimate goal of Primal Blueprint Fitness. I’ve already stated that enjoyment of life is what being fit is all about. I maintain my fitness in order to enjoy life, rather than hobble around from waiting room to waiting room. What better way to muster some real happiness than to play like a kid again? This is an ab- solutely integral aspect of the Primal Blueprint Fitness program. When playing, you’re often getting exercise without even knowing it. Plus, play has been a vital part of our lives for many thousands of years, used as a way to unwind, connect with community, or—quite simply—enjoy life.

Please point me to one serious athlete who trains every SINGLE session at maximum effort. The point he's trying to make is that we can't and shouldn't always be beating ourselves to a pulp. It is counter productive and even if you love the sport, if you are going ALL OUT every single time you step on the field (or strap on the shoes, or whatever) you will do more damage than good and likely not be able to enjoy the sport (or just life) to your fullest potential.

This would assume that people only train in one sport. Lots of well-rounded people I know, myself included, train in multiple sports every day. I teach spin for 45 minutes in the morning on Tuesdays, and then later have a 3 -hour dance rehearsal--of course not all 3 hours is maximum effort, however there is always more than 30 minutes at max effort; otherwise, why are you there? I also cycle for a minimum of 2 hours at a time -- usually more like 4 -- because . . . I'm going somewhere. Around here there are a lot of hills -- they will push you to maximum effort, but then you go down hill -- minimum effort. It balances out, but there is usually a lot more than 30 minutes of 75% heartrate -- this is common among cyclists. Finally, when you're in the ocean, SUPing or surfing you'd better be putting out maximum effort while swimming or paddling over waves the entire time, or . . . you will never catch one to ride in. By the time you haul your board to the beach, no one's gonna quit in 30 minutes.

Personally, I believe both cardio and strength training have a place in my workout regime. Along with yoga. What I have trouble swallowing is the 5,000,000 conflicting opinions on the "best" exercise for weight loss. The fact of the matter is, whatever exercise you're going to do and enjoy is the best for you, whether that's long endurance cardio, intense HIIT, Pilates, yoga, strength training, Zumba, spinning, or any combination of these and the many types of exercise you can do.

Wow, what a great discussion. Seems to me we've got abit hung up on the definitions and values of different types of exercise. But some things are well researched.

In my days in medical research (left to become a winemaker in 2000) I remember teaching about the inverted J curve of exercise intensity duration and the immune system response. If you exercise or do some activity at 85% or more exertion/heart rate for more than 45 minutes per day you measureably compromise your immune system. Also after a bout of high intensity exercise there is a 'window' of approximately 2 hours when you immune system is measurably depleted or less active and you may be more susceptible to developing an infection, especially respiratory tract infection IF there are sufficient germs around, either loitering in your upper airways or arriving from other individuals.

As you drop back on the intensity this effect goes away and you can exercise all day long (just like Mark Sisson found). In ELITE athletes there is an observable increase in the incidence of upper repiratory tract infections, and in females, urinary tract infections immediately prior to, during and immediately after major competitions. There may also be an increase in skin infections though this was less clear. And there is an observable increase in injuries of the muscles and joints.

BUT - the other bit of the inverted J curve is very important. As you increase your exercise/activity levels your health by many measures improve in an almost direct fashion. This includes heart health, improved mobility of joints, mood, appetite regulation, insulin/sugar regulation and immune responsiveness.

What does this mean for us average folk who just want to get fit and have fun? Cardio is really good for you.
Don't overdo it, but do do it. Long bouts of sub-maximal exercise like walking, working, biking is really good and you can go all day if you want. Weight training has measurable benefits as listed above but don't over do it. Don't do the high intensity stuff for too long at a time. The fitness nuts who do long sessions of tabata and extreme spin are fit but not necessarily as healthy as they could be.

Just my 2 cents worth.